We're doing something different this time. Usually, we talk write on ideas; today, we're mentioning a few people. But, the focus is Max Planck since one of his books is crucial to defining and testing truth engineering.
He was the Nobel Prize Awardee for 1918: Max Karl Ernst Ludwig Planck. This pointer goes to his profile on the Nobel site where the tabs are: Facts; Biographical; Nobel Lecture; Banquet speech; Nominations; Documentary; Photo gallery; Other resources. They have been updating the records for all Awardees, from the beginning which was in 1901.
We intend to use this work for a review of the history of science in terms of decisions and their management using the Nobel choices to assess the cultural drifts. This year's prizes for Physics, Chemistry and Medicine got my attention, as I have been doing advanced computing (including AI) for decades.
Earlier this year, I decided to pour through Planck's treatis on thermodynamics where he quotes those before him (Gibbs, van der Waals, and others) plus his contemporaries. By pour through, I mean actually get into his head and assess the situation, decisions, and such through the entire discussion. Why? Science is cultural as it is done by people. Mathematics may not admit such for itself, but science is known for this. If that is not known, then pay attention.
My research is abetted by the computer. As well, I used AIn't in 2019 after determining that choices were being made that were not to best of anyone's interest, in the longer term. Also, I argue that there is no "critter" involved. We see applied mathematics being exercised on heated circuits in order to have various side effects that might be interesting. But, after the two years, we all see the failings. Where there is hype, one can still see disturbing acceptance of failed results.
Okay, Planck represents the early science days when not much was known, intuition wsa a heavy hitter, lots of worldviews were extant and forceful, and such. Same conditions as now. Except one big thing. We have students learning almost as if their subject matter was deus ex machina. How did this happen? Too, we have seen a decline in responsibility, a complete evacuation of the idea of quality, and more that represent a type of decline, yet the tools and resources are there to do better.
Long term is the only thing that's true right now, for purposeful activity. But, it is not that bad. Before too long, we can start to lay out the model that looks to be interesting, albeit nothing of this matter is as simple as some would like.
Remarks: Modified: 12/14/2024
12/14/2024 --
No comments:
Post a Comment